Rogers: <”A second bid for counterplay. 26...Nc5 27.Kd1 Nxd3 28.exd3! (Not 28.Kxc2?? Ne1+) 28...Rc8 gives Black a great knight on d5 but after 29.f3! and 30.Rc2, the position must be a slow but sure win for White.”>

Polgar: <”White has a few reasonable responses. 26.Kd1, 26.gxf5 or 26.Rg1. White is better in all three lines.”>

Illescas-Cordoba: <”Kramnik finds the most stubborn defence. White has problems to get his rook into play.”>

Black’s move 26 is a blunder as it produces a lost position (evaluation >1.40). Because none of the analysts, three of whom are GMs, spotted this as an error, let alone as a losing move (one even gave it an !), this analyst spent considerable amount of time investigating the length and depth of many variations that spring from this move, to reassure himself that the evaluation validly expressed a lost game for Black.

Some of the analysis is in later posts in this series, but it is a deeply complex and subtle endgame, requiring enormous patience to prosecute; and the analysis is by no means complete. There are numerous subvariations where the slightest mistake can cancel the winning advantage, and moreover with branching subvariations at many, sometimes successive, moves of almost equal value. There are quite a few variations with moves that can only be described as machine moves, that humans probably wouldn’t think of playing, eg: setting up the capture of a central pawn in the endgame, and having achieved that capacity then resists capturing to support other advances on the board.

The analysis has been saved and is accessible to the curious and/or the masochistic. It’s worth noting that the >1.40 evaluation for this move did not emerge until after considerable engine time and frequently goosed analysis; it was necessitated by the need to spend additional time ironing out inconsistencies in the engine’s evaluations of the moves in this part of the game.

Once the rook retreats, Black’s position is very difficult and maybe even indefensible, as Rogers pointed out. White’s rook swings over to c2 and Black has to concede the c-file or face a lost B vs N ending. The penetration of the rook combined with the King and Bishop to shepherd the queen side pawn majority will make Black’s life miserable. After extensive testing of many variations, there appears to be no forced win. Most variations do in fact end in a win for White, indicating that in practical play White would usually win, as Black has to be excruciatingly accurate to survive this sort of ending. On careful examination of the critical moves, this analyst has always found a saving resource for Black, and comes to the conclusion on the balance of probabilities that there is no forced win for White in the position starting from <26…Nc5>.

It is understandable that Kramnik avoided this variation for a wilder bid for freedom (26…f5), and in its own way the latter move pays off as Anand lets him off the hook in subsequent play. Accordingly, the exclamation mark awarded by GM Illescas for Black’s 26th move is deserved as it describes Black’s best practical bid for freedom, but under the cold hard pitiless and <unhuman> scrutiny of the machine, it constitutes a blunder as it must lose if White conducts the response perfectly.

Polgar: <”White is still working on getting his Rook active. If he is able to do that, he will have good chances to score a full point. It is obviously not a simple task.”>

GAME MOVE 29:

<29. Ke1> ( 1.09)

Polgar: <”An unusual move in this position but it does not do any harm to his position. 29.Rg1 is more logical to me.”>

Pein: <”Karpov advocated Rg1 as a better way to avoid any knight forks but this is also good. Vishy takes it nice and slowly.”>

Rogers: <”?!”>

<29. Rg1> is indeed a better choice ( 1.29), however only <29. e3> opening the second rank to the rook to enable access to the c-file actually maintains the win.

As foreshadowed after Black’s blunder with <26…f5>, the endgame is obscure and difficult, and took extensive verification of numerous variations to confirm that the engine’s assessment of the position since Black’s 26th move is indeed correct, and not a machine aberration or symptomatic of endgame ineptness by the engine.

Clearing the second rank, ready to oppose and exchange rooks on the c-file.

MAIN VARIATION MOVE 29:

<29…fxg4>

Black could also try <29…Nc4>, but to little avail, eg: <30. Re2 (…31. e4 with greater effect than in the main variation because of the presence of Black’s f-pawn) 30…Rd8 31. Kc2 Rc8 32. Kb3 Na5+ 33. Ka2> and now if:

If <29. hxg4>, then <29…Nc4 30. Re2 Rf8 31. f4 (31. Ne1 is passive) 31…Rd8 32. Kc2 Rc8 33. Kb3> is similar to the main variation being developed here, but after <33…Nf6>, the unprotected g-pawn needs to be protected with the rook, diverting it from its mission on the c-file, or the pawn has to advance to <34. g5> after which Black has <34…Ne4>:

threatening <35…h6> with sufficient counter play in light of White’s passive bishop and underused rook, and his own active pieces and solid defensive formation to be hopeful of securing a draw and neutralizing the queen side pawn majority, eg: if <35. Rg2 g6 36. Ka2 Na5> holds the line.

This spectacular move temporarily meets both threats as <35. e4> would dissipate White’s win after the exchanges: <35…Rxd3 36. exd5 exd5>. More important than the temporary concession of a pawn, this exchange would allow Black’s rook to be active behind White’s lines.

MAIN VARIATION MOVE 35:

<35. Re2>

The only move, but sufficient to maintain winning momentum. Black can only buy time, not salvation.

MAIN VARIATION MOVE 35:

<35…Rc8 36. Rh2 (threatening 37. e4) and White has a smorgasbord of choices from each of Black’s most viable replies, including <36…Nb6>, <36…Nf6>, <36…a6>, <36…Rc7>, <36…Nb7> and <36…Rc4>.

White’s basic strategy will be to use his pieces to maximize his extra pawn and to shepherd his queen side majority forward, gradually tying down Black’s defenses, and forcing the extra pawn through with decisive effect. The shortcoming of <26…f5> to the alternative defence <26…Nc5> that was discussed previously is that with <26…Nc5>, Black can set up a defensive formation on the King side, typically consisting of pawns on g5, f6 and e6, and possibly also h6 depending upon whether h-pawns have been exchanged, with a Night on d5 and the rook on the second rank, whereas those defensive (and extremely tedious and difficult) possibilities are not available in this variation.

Some of the subvariations that emanate from Black’s 36th move have been explored, but have not been included here for space considerations. Anyone interested is invited to explore those subvariations themselves and compare notes with my own findings.

CONCLUSION: <As <<29. Ke1>> brings the evaluation well below 1.41 , it constitutes a blunder and adds a further <<2.0>> to the games error weighting.>

Illescas-Cordoba: <” Kramnik pointed this move as the final mistake at the press conference. Probably he was right. [ Black could get more drawing chances with 33...Rc2!? ; or 33...Re8!? while admitting white is still clearly better.]”>

The losing move…Black’s game is lost after this and remains that way. <33…Re8> ( 1.26) was necessary:

Despite the two extra pawns, White does not have a win, eg: <35…Kf7 37. Re2 (37. Kd3 is an alternative, but not 37. Kc3? Re3+) Rb8 38. Kc3 Kf6 39. Re6+ (White has to give up the f-pawns so he can capture the a-pawn, because if Black can slip the a4 move in, he has a draw – an alternative is 39. Re4 preventing 39…a4, but this is also defensible for Black) 37…Kxf5 38. Re5+ Kxf4 39. Rxa5>:

Polgar: <” Kramnik and his team must be scratching their heads. He is being outplayed in complicated positions which typically favor Anand and he is also being outplayed by Anand in a dull and quiet position which supposed to favor Kramnik. They have to figure things out quickly as we are at the half way point of this very short match.”>

The <engine preference> is <34...Nxf2>, but only by a small margin. Black is lost

GAME MOVE 35:

<35. Rg4> ( 1.65)

<Engine preference> is <35.Ke2>, but this makes no difference as again the margin of differences is small. The move played by White clearly wins.

GAME MOVE 35:

<35…Nc4> ( 2.32)

Polgar: <” Kramnik chose not to win back one pawn with Nxf5. He instead chose to go after the b2 pawn. 36.Nd1 would give White a serious advantage.”>

Illescas-Cordoba: <” [ After 35...Nf5 36.Ra4 Nde3 37.Be3 Ne3 it would be a matter of technique ]>

The <engine preference> follows GM Illescas-Coredoba: <35...Nxf5 36.Rxa4 Ndxe3 37.Bxe3 Nxe3>. However, as he points out it is a matter of technique.

GAME MOVE 36:

<36. e4> ( 1.90)

Illescas-Cordoba: <”[ Why not a simple retreat? After 36.Nd1! Anand told me that he was worried with the blockade of the black knights but to my view after Kf7 37.Rd4 Ndb6 38.Bc3 white is simply two pawns up. ]”>

Illescas-Cordoba: <” Takes one pawn back but the position is still lost. [After 37...Ne4 there is a forced variation: 38.Ne4 Re8 39.Bc3 Re4 40.Kf2! Ne5 41.Re3! Re3 42.Ke3 and white is easily winning here ]”>

Polgar: <” I think a better move is 37..Nxe4 38.Nxe4 Re8”>

<Main engine preference>: < 1.90: 37...Nxe4 38.Nxe4 >

GAME MOVE 38:

<38. e5> ( 2.63). Crushing.

Rogers: <” 38.Bc3 Nh5 is not so clear.”>

Illescas-Cordoba: <” A precise move which is a giant step to the victory. [ weaker would be 38.Bc3? Nh5! ]”>

Pein: <” ! [38.Bc3 Nh5]”>

Note: <38. Bc3> is a blunder as it concedes a winning position. <38. Bh6> also wins (if 38…Ne6 39. f6 and if 38…Rc7 39. e5).

Illescas-Cordoba: <” The last precise move Anand had to find. This wins by force. [ His original idea was 42.Nf6? Nf6 43.ef6 but then he saw that after Re8! 44.Kd1 Rd8! 45.Kc2 Rd2 46.Kc3 Rf2 47.Kc4 Rf6 48.Kb5 Rf4 black could get this rook endgame which he thought should be winning but was not sure. In fact it may be a draw, i.e.: 49.Rg4 Rf3 50.Ka4 Rh3 51.Kb4 h5 52.Rg1 Rh4 53.Kb5 Rg4 ]>

This superb and thorough analysis clearly shows the subtleties of a complicated and difficult endgame. The fact that both Anand and Kramnik went through it with a minimal number of mistakes illustrates chess at the highest human levels.

thathwamasi: <Phony Benoni> This was a pun submitted by myself through the pun submission page. After Anand won two games with black, his win with white seemed minor and harmless...infact resulting in greater good...and hence I called it "white lies" - Thanks

pablo333: I have sifted through forty-eight pages of Kibitz text in search of an answer; but to no avail. Therefore: can anyone explain the reasoning behind 6... Qf5? Surely the whole point of black recapturing the pawn with his Queen on move five is to obtain a lead in development - secured by his b4 Bishop's pin of the c3 Knight. Having gotten the superior development he was aiming for, what then prompted Kramnik to abandon his strategy by wasting a valuable tempo (moving his Queen a second time in the opening)?

picard: pablo i think he was simply hoping for 7. Qxf5 exf5 Sure, it doubles up pawns but gives black control of e4. Later black might fianchetto his bishop, with the goal of putting either it or the knight onto e4.

pablo333: Thank you picard - an endgame with black's Knight or Q-Bishop planted on e4 is a fine (if over-ambitious) idea; Anand was clearly right to avoid the Queen exchange. Some months ago I suffered a reverse in this position as white; but after 5 cd5 Qd5 my opponent played more conventional moves like: 6... 0-0 & 7... c5 (or thereabouts). After defending a slightly worse game quite well (in terms of my playing strength), I eventually collapsed under the pressure.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous,
and 100% free--plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.

No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.

No personal attacks against other members.

Nothing in violation of United States law.

Don't post personal information of members.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.